----- Forwarded by Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US on 08/05/2010 10:30 AM

----- |------------> | From: | |------------>

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------| |"Johnson, Nancy" <Nancy.Johnson@hq.doe.gov> |

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | To: | |------------>

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------| |"'Bromberg, Kevin L.'" <kevin.bromberg@sba.gov>, Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA |

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Cc: | |------------>

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------| |"Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov>, "Kymn, Christine J." <Christine_J._Kymn@omb.eop.gov> |

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Date: | |------------>

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------| |08/04/2010 03:57 PM |

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Subject: | |------------>

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------| |RE: SI Limited Use engines- Question for Group |

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------|

I would agree that some practical form of relief should be provided for these engines.

Nancy

From: Bromberg, Kevin L. [mailto:kevin.bromberg@sba.gov] Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2010 2:30 PM To: King.Melanie@epamail.epa.gov; Wayland.Robertj@epamail.epa.gov Cc: Higgins, Cortney; Kymn, Christine J.; Johnson, Nancy Subject: FW: SI Limited Use engines- Question for Group

These are the comments on limited use engines (see below). To respond to EPA’s question about how limited use engines operate, this is all that we know: API Comments 5.4.4, 6.2 and 6.18; INGAA Comment #7.

I can’t justify requiring performance tests for these engines when it is not required for black start engines. As stated below, some of these other engines “as a fire pumps or other existing units located at a facility that may operate very little depending upon demand” which are seldom if ever operated, appear to be equally deserving of coverage as black start engines. And “some transmission lines include small stations that run very infrequently – i.e., only operate when there is significant gas demand (or for routine engine checks) and may not run at all or only a few hours in some years.” Again, the emissions that result from testing could exceed the operating emissions for these engines.

KevinFrom: Jim McCarthy [mailto:jamesmccarthy@comcast.net]

Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 7:26 PM To: Bromberg, Kevin L. Cc: 'Lisa Beal'; 'Jeffrey Panek'; toddm@api.org Subject: RE: SI Limited Use engines- Question for Group

Kevin,

This email follows-up on my brief response earlier this morning, and references to API and INGAA comments on “limited use” follow. Comments were submitted recommending Management / Work Practices rather than emission standards and these engines DO exist.

API June 2009 comments (detailed comments are docket document no. 0242.2) include several references to “limited use” and “intermittent use” engines, including comments 5.4.4, 6.2 and 6.18. If you search for “limited use” in the attached file, you will find those comments, which note that EPA should retain the limited use subcategory from the original NESHAP, and recommend exemptions or work practices rather than emissions limits due to the low operating time for these types of installations. The comments also note that EPA has not adequately considered costs, control technology and emission standard viability, etc for engines that run intermittently.

INGAA June 2009 comments (docket document no. 0155.1) only briefly discuss “limited use” engines. Comment 7 discusses the need for additional subcategories (see pdf page 38 of 94 in the attached INGAA Comments) and includes the following regarding new a subcategory for limited use engines:

“Other examples include existing engines with very little run time, such as a fire pumps or other existing units located at a facility that may operate very little depending upon demand. Depending on the engine size, an emission standard will likely apply, – thus requiring installation of controls on units that seldom if ever operate. Or, if management practices apply, a frequency based on calendar hours would require maintenance for an engine that has not operated (discussed further in Comment 23). Thus, a subcategory may be warranted for engines with limited use.”

The limited used category was in the original NESHAP and EPA appears to be backing away from that subcategory. In addition to the comments, I believe the issue has been raised in discussions with EPA, but it has been a lower priority item as MACT floor, above the floor, urban versus rural, etc have been higher priority during the limited time available in meetings/discussions. The scenario discussed in the email this morning discusses one example... some transmission lines include small stations that run very infrequently – i.e., only operate when there is significant gas demand (or for routine engine checks) and may not run at all or only a few hours in some years. Those stations are important on high demand days, but would require emission tests, potentially add-on controls, etc if emission limits are included in the rule rather than work practices.

Thanks.